Cut the nose to spite the face

First topic message reminder :

Did they just cut the nose to spite the face ?

Yes indeed ECB cut their nose to spite their face.

With 7000 runs, 88 tests @ 50+ average, a big 100 in his last overseas innings in Lanka to keep England hanging in as No. 1 and another big hundred in what was defnitely his LAST test to yet again keep them hanging by a flimsy thread as No.1....KP's status as their biggest superstar in the last 3 decades and a legend in English cricket is already confirmed.


The intent obviously was to "hit back and hurt back".......instead of finding ways to reconcile and move forward.
Unfortunately ECB's timing was as bad as their intent.
.
If it was repraminding and putting down a newbie with 20 odd tests and 1500 runs.....then ECB's intent to "hit back and hurt" may have worked.......but here they have probably added martyrdom to an exisiting superstardom.

KP could have finished with 9000 or even 10,000 runs in the next 3 years....even without those extra 2,000 runs runs..nothing changes in his standing as a cricketer...the loser is English cricket.

An extraordinary batsman, who served England well for long, a flawed genius who acknowledged his flawed emotionalism and one who took severeal steps towards reconcillation....the super star who was made a martyr today by the bureaucrats who did a classic " cut their nose to spite their own face"......is how history would sum it up when dust settles over this issue.

I think Strauss will continue on after this series and possibly to the next Ashes.

It's too early for Root. It's only this season where he started to deliver some scores to add to his potential. We need to stop jumping the gun with the younger players. We've already done it with Bairstow and he looked a little out of his depth despite his strong scoring in the county game. Although to be fair I think the selectors thought the WI series was a good time to blood an up and comer.

Mike Selig wrote:Swann was warned about future conduct after publishing his book.

KP has been warned numerous times.

In any case surely anyone can see there is a difference between writing a book and criticising your captain in texts sent to your opposition during a game?

Regardless of any wrong-doing from the ECB (and I agree with Eirebilly that they should have handled Pietersen's concerns about workloads better, and their policy that you have to play ODIs if you want to play T20s is foolish) what KP did is unacceptable and inexcusable.

Swann was warned is a joke
he was like passively encourgaed.
Disparaging a fellow player and breaking the dressing room morale by writing in a book is a verifiable in black and white offence.
sms...no one has validated what was exactly sent.

The one who made a verfiable offence gets away with passive encourgaement....and becomes a bigger pest in the dressing room.
the one who "allegedly-sent-something-unverifiable is beheaded.

It's becoming clear....that KP was not the initiator but the "recieving butt" of disharmony in the dressing room.

I still think he will do better than Strauss. Strauss really really looks past it now.

eirebilly wrote:KP_fan;

Are you seriously implying that KP is totally innocent in this whole affair?

He is a victim...who was targetted, set-up, harrased and triggered to explode in the media.

Daily Mail who seem to be all over the Text story are suggesting that the Texts, were mocking Andrew Strauss and in some encouraging Steyn to get him out. If true to send these types of texts to your opposition, during a Test match regardless of the context they were sent is a disgrace and no wonder the ECB have acted as they have.

If I were KP, first thing I would be doing is change my "Advisors". Whoever came up with the YouTube video needs their heads examined. ECB asked him not to release it, informing him it was a breach of his contract and he still goes ahead and post’s it online.

KP_fan wrote:

Swann was warned is a joke
he was like passively encourgaed.

No it isn't and no he wasn't. It is well known amongst England circles that Swann was severely reprimanded after his book was published. It just so happens that it wasn't done in public. KP has similarly been warned in private a few times already. For some offences you can no longer just deal with them privately.

Similarly just because you don't know exactly what KP said in his texts don't assume that the management don't.

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:I still think he will do better than Strauss. Strauss really really looks past it now.

I'm pretty worried about his form myself but he'll be given more time than most due to his captaincy. Whether that's right is another matter for debate.

It’s a shame, that at least for the short term, the ECB and Kevin Pietersen aren’t together anymore. They do seem to deserve each other right now.

One party drops certain players based on derogatory private texts they haven’t seen, and another releases a hammy video the night before selection decision instead of just making a call, or sending a text.

Right now the sticking point seems to be that KP may or may not have sent a derogatory text to the South Africans. He’s not publicly stated that the texts weren’t derogatory. And the ECB have had enough.

And as Hugh Morris says: “The success of the England team has been built on a unity of purpose and trust.”

Trust is the key word there.

When KP walked into meeting after meeting with the ECB only for his private communications to be leaked to the media, where was the trust then? Where was the unity? What was the purpose?

No ECB employees or board members were dropped for their behaviour.

And I’m no KP sympathizer. KP has played this as badly as he has ever played any left-arm finger spinner. Publicly, he’s looked like a buffoon. Privately, he’s whinged and moaned. And in meetings about his future he’s been naïve and bullish (if you believe the leaked information). Almost every piece of action he has taken has been easily mocked by his critics. And this is a man of many critics.

Yet, for all his faults and missteps and badly premeditated actions, the reason for him not playing in this next Text is a private communication between him and a friend. A member of the opposition, perhaps, but a member of the opposition that he smashed around the park last weekend.

KP has essentially been suspended for doing what every single one of us has done in our life, complained to a friend about our boss.

It seems about as petty a reason to drop someone as you can find. He didn’t break the law, he didn’t publicly abuse anyone, and he performed at the absolute maximum of his abilities, he just also had a private sulk.

What of other private communications? Should Giles Clarke, Andy Flower and Hugh Morris state publicly that in no conversations with anyone, via text, email or over the phone have they ever said anything derogatory about Kevin Pietersen? Trust.

Or should they just announce that in a show of good faith they are instigating an independent inquiry into who leaked the information?

We all make mistakes, and both sides have made a meal of this consistently, so why not just have a meeting with the aggrieved parties and let them chat about it. Keep the details of the meeting private. Let those upset by possible naughty texts explain why. And let those who feel that he can’t trust his employers to confront them, and perhaps even apologise for being a bit of a tool at times.

I doubt he’s the only player in this English team to complain about Strauss, Flower, Giles, Morris or the selectors. Has anyone checked Graeme Swann’s phone to see what he told his friends after being dropped for the last Test? Or did he even test the trust of the team when he released an autobiography that criticised Samit Patel and Pietersen?

The treatment of Patel in Sri Lanka was not exactly all about trust and unity, now was it?
Maybe even Strauss, in a moment of madness and completely out of character for him, said a mildly derogatory not expletive-laden comment to a friend about KP over the last week.
Strauss and Flower are proud and intelligent men who have succeeded in life and lead men well.

Are they really so easily upset by the fact that their most enigmatic and highly strung player might not always love them?

There isn’t an office, art collective, acappella group, or community farm in the world that doesn’t have people who at one time or another don’t get along. It’s what happens in jobs when more than a few people work together. You’re brought together to do a job, it’s nice when you make friends at work, but regardless of what Christian ads from the mid 90s showed, we don’t always get along. What people generally do is work around personalities and just get the job done regardless.

Let’s not say that sport is different. Shane Warne openly despised his coach; there was no need for texts. Shaquille O’Neal and Kobe Bryant hated each other as they won three straight championships. Their hatred even has a wiki page. But they made it through. And Victoria Pendleton hasn’t always pleased her team-mates.

The ECB has to recognize that it’s their job to manage their players, KP’s failure is their failure too.

The ECB has decided to put the personal squabbles first. Only they know how bad this rift is, until they leak it. But by overlooking their own mistakes and focusing on the real or imagined ones of KP it is leading their team into a must win Test match without their in-form match-winner.

It’s not just trust in Morris’ sentence. It’s unity of purpose as well. To be the best in the world. And because of their own and KP’s actions, the lack of trust has led to them abandoning their best chance of winning this Test and staying on top of the rankings.

The ECB want to be No. 1 in the world, KP wants to be a legend. Surely they’re both more likely to do this together than apart.

http://cricketwithballs.com/

The author of that article, Jarrod Kimber, is one of the people speaking most sense on the issue, for me. He has penned a couple of very well balanced articles.

Thats an excellent article.

KP_fan wrote:

eirebilly wrote:KP_fan;

Are you seriously implying that KP is totally innocent in this whole affair?

He is a victim...who was targetted, set-up, harrased and triggered to explode in the media.

Ok, are you on the wind up now?

Its rather worrying that our selectors pick teams based on "principles" rather than "performances". Performances win you matches.

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:I still think he will do better than Strauss. Strauss really really looks past it now.

Strauss is still one of the best batsmen in the world according to some on here!

He's obviously in decline, which isn't surprising given he is 36. The thing now of course is he'll never get back to the level he was at.

Sadly, the Strauss of today is a pale shadow of that of 2005-2007 and 2009 Ashes. I think its becoming an issue as we have a fairly shotless top 3 and now with no KP to lift the rate afterwards! Of couse Trott and Cook are safe as unlike Strauss they can go on to get the big scores. Against a good attack, Strauss will usually return a slow 20-30 these days.

I cant see Strauss stepping down but i think that it is getting to that point. He is just not doing his job to a consistent and satisfactory level thats required. He has not been doing this for a long time as well and i cant really see him improving at the age of 36.
I would like to see him step down and let Cook take over but who will replace him?

I think Strauss will step down after next years Ashes

I actually think Trott is the man. Would give us a LH/RH opening combo, and its not too unusual for a number 3 to be promoted to open. Then have Bell at 3 - he did great there last year and wouldn't mind seeing it again.

KP at 4 if he's playing that week, and anyone's guess out of Bopara/Morgan/Bairstow/Taylor/AN Other at 5 and 6.

You're probably right GSC but i would love to see Cook lead the next Ashes series.

I am not so sure VTR, Trott is an amazing 3 so i would really not want to change that. As for Morgan, love the guy to his bones but he is never going to make it as a test player i feel.

Cook
?????
Trott
Bell
Taylor
Prior

I'd be loathe to do it eirebilly, as you say Trott is great at 3.

My thinking was along the lines of there being no standout replacement, so our top 4 should comprise our best 4 players to give the best chance of success. Bring in a young opener and I think Trott is virtually going to be opening against a good attack. That could almost be a counter-argument for keeping Strauss, but I'd rather try to replace him and bring younger players in down the order.

It probably wont happen, a specialist opener will most likely replace Strauss.

Well I am a left hand bastman, not very good, but I bowl slow left arm as well.

I don't know whether I have a Grand Mother or Father in England, but I can fit the bill.

I am a team man, of solid breeding and I hate tweeting.

That was a good article until it completely glossed over the fact that Pietersen mouthed off to an opponent during the test match. The fact they are friends off the field is irrelevant, had he sent the text after the series, or even between tests then that's different, but...

Sometimes someone just becomes unmanageable and the best option is to cut and take your losses. I'm not sure this was the case (yet) with KP, and I'm not sure the right choice was made, but it certainly wasn't the easy option, and it certainly won't have been taken lightly.

Its a very difficult position VTR but i would certainly give a young guy the chance to open and leave Trott at 3.
Strauss is fast turning into a Collingwood situation, very much in decline but just grabs the odd good score to keep his nose above his challengers.

Mike Selig wrote:That was a good article until it completely glossed over the fact that Pietersen mouthed off to an opponent during the test match. The fact they are friends off the field is irrelevant, had he sent the text after the series, or even between tests then that's different, but...

Sometimes someone just becomes unmanageable and the best option is to cut and take your losses. I'm not sure this was the case (yet) with KP, and I'm not sure the right choice was made, but it certainly wasn't the easy option, and it certainly won't have been taken lightly.

Mike, I do think the ECB need to look at why it has got to this stage. They are not faultless by any stretch and I think this was the easy option for the ECB as otherwise they would have to look to their own failings. England have had stars similar to KP in the past. Boycott and Botham to name but two (I'm not comparing theier personalitites before anyone jumps on me) and the ECB should really by trying to ensure there is dressing room harmony to a reasonable extent like it had been managed in the past. The fact there wasn't and it's got this far shines the spotlight on their policies and principles.

As i have said before, both the ECB and KP have to take long hard looks at themselves in the mirror. They are both fully to blame in this whole debarcle.

liverbnz wrote:

Mike, I do think the ECB need to look at why it has got to this stage. They are not faultless by any stretch and I think this was the easy option for the ECB as otherwise they would have to look to their own failings. England have had stars similar to KP in the past. Boycott and Botham to name but two (I'm not comparing theier personalitites before anyone jumps on me) and the ECB should really by trying to ensure there is dressing room harmony to a reasonable extent like it had been managed in the past. The fact there wasn't and it's got this far shines the spotlight on their policies and principles.

Liverbnz - I agree that the ECB need to look at why it has got to this stage. Without wishing to speak on his behalf, I suspect Mike might agree too. Furthermore, the ECB might also agree. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that the ECB were at fault or wrong to act the way they did.

I don't go along with it being the easy option for the ECB. A lack of any real action and a papering over of the cracks would seem an easier approach although ultimately more counter productive.

Re Boycott. Whilst the England Test side undoubtedly missed his batting, his exile contributed significantly to increased dressing room harmony and probably did more good than harm.

Yes, the spotlight does shine on the ECB's policies and principles. However, it also shines on Pietersen's actions and illuminates fault there for all to clearly see.

I have long maintained that Pietersen is a magnificent batsman. Further evidence of that was shown to me only last month when he destroyed a decent Lancs attack at Guildford in compiling an unbeaten double hundred with a superb display of power and precision. However, I have also previously posted long held doubts that character flaws would prevent him becoming a true great of the game. Sadly, it looks as if that view is to be proved correct.

In total contrast to dedicated professionals like Cook and Bell, something like this was always waiting to happen with Pietersen. Possibly the ECB could have acted better here. However, what about the next time and the time after that? A multi talented batsman and his supporters can only hide his character flaws so many times.

Just read this on cric info:

The next significant date in the current dispute between Kevin Pietersen and the ECB is looming on Saturday with the deadline for England to name their World Twenty20 squad.

Confidential negotiations are still ongoing and Pietersen's representatives have not given up on him being considered for the squad if the situation is resolved.

Hope i am wrong but i give this a 10% chance.

liverbnz wrote:

Mike, I do think the ECB need to look at why it has got to this stage. They are not faultless by any stretch and I think this was the easy option for the ECB as otherwise they would have to look to their own failings. England have had stars similar to KP in the past. Boycott and Botham to name but two (I'm not comparing theier personalitites before anyone jumps on me) and the ECB should really by trying to ensure there is dressing room harmony to a reasonable extent like it had been managed in the past. The fact there wasn't and it's got this far shines the spotlight on their policies and principles.

Certainly the ECB need to analyse why it's gone so far.

But you know what, I've been in a situation where we've had to send someone home mid-tour a couple of years ago, and my co-coach had to make that call. More recently there was an incident in Holland and again I had to make a tough call. It's most assuredly not the easy decision (as guilford has said, the easy thing to do would have been to accept the belated apology, and ignore the texts), and you look back (not immediately, it's important to give yourself a bit of time to cool down and reflect) and wonder what you could have done differently. I have no doubt Flower and co will be doing so, although right now their energy will rightfully be all consumed into winning the test. And they may well do it, this kind of thing can have a galvanising effect on a side (it did on ours, we won our remaining matches on the tour, and in Holland gave our best performance).

My immediate analysis is that the ECB should have shown more sympathy with KP's schedule concerns. I think that their reaction convinced him they didn't care, and once he thought that the spiralling was pretty inevitable. In my case I pinpointed a couple of things I should have done differently but at the end of the day KP is a grown-up and has to take responsibility for his unnacceptable actions.

You say that this should have been managed as people like Boycott and Botham were managed in the past. I suggest (in fact I know) that KP has already at numerous times been managed in this way. The point I made in my original post was that it is a lot easier to manage such egos when the team is winning. There comes a point though, where it is impossible to manage. Where the adverse effect on the rest of the team is greater than the potential match-winning capabilities of the ego. Simply put where the player does more harm than good. At this point the right decision is to cut and run. This is not the easy route, precisely because of the spotlight it will bring, and the obvious criticism if things go wrong. But for the good of the team in both the short and long term it is the right call.

I don't know what Flower's limits are, at which point he deems a situation unmanageable. But I suggest that sending derogotary texts to the opposition in the middle of a game should fall on the wrong side of any sensible ones.

skyeman wrote:Just read this on cric info:

The next significant date in the current dispute between Kevin Pietersen and the ECB is looming on Saturday with the deadline for England to name their World Twenty20 squad.

Confidential negotiations are still ongoing and Pietersen's representatives have not given up on him being considered for the squad if the situation is resolved.

Hope i am wrong but i give this a 10% chance.

Seriously? I give it less than 1%.

I think its unfair to Pietersen that he was harshly dropped while the ECB that organized a leak campaign against him remains unaccountable. I think its unfair to Pietersen that Graeme Swann(another real favorite of me in the English side) got away with a public attack on Pietersen that was, is there for all to see while he was targeted on an SMS that he send to a friend who happened to play for the opposing side, contents of which aren't available in the public domain.
Has this rift affected his contributions to the side? Has he started not fully commiting himself to the team cause that winning on field? Everyone will have their answer from the last couple of test hundreds he scored for the side.
The West Indies, by unfairly and idiotically dropping gained nothing other than a political captain who is a cricketing deadweight, and a record number of openers and opening combinations!. And on his return he showed what difference he could make to the side.
I don't know whether Kevin Pietersen will have any chances to show that to the ludicrous cricketing administrators of the ECB, who imagine themselves to be supermen or loard almighty himself personified, handing out punishments at will or should I say vims and fancies?
I am not saying Kevin Pietersen hasn't done anytnthing wrong in the whole saga. But there were circumstances that has to be fitted in to the larger context. After he said sorry in public and retracted all the dificult demands, the ECB, who's role in the entire saga has been pretty bad, should have drawn a line under it for now. But after a public show of power, they are out to humiliate him now, and I'd call that petty.

Mike Selig wrote:

skyeman wrote:Just read this on cric info:

The next significant date in the current dispute between Kevin Pietersen and the ECB is looming on Saturday with the deadline for England to name their World Twenty20 squad.

Confidential negotiations are still ongoing and Pietersen's representatives have not given up on him being considered for the squad if the situation is resolved.

Hope i am wrong but i give this a 10% chance.

Seriously? I give it less than 1%.

I did type ZERO, but changed it just in case, you never know

skyeman wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:

skyeman wrote:Just read this on cric info:

The next significant date in the current dispute between Kevin Pietersen and the ECB is looming on Saturday with the deadline for England to name their World Twenty20 squad.

Confidential negotiations are still ongoing and Pietersen's representatives have not given up on him being considered for the squad if the situation is resolved.

Hope i am wrong but i give this a 10% chance.

Seriously? I give it less than 1%.

I did type ZERO, but changed it just in case, you never know

It won't happen. If he's not in the Test squad now, I can't see him returning until at least when the central contracts are renewed (after the World T20) and quite possibly not at all.

Would also depend on the direction the England side would take in the coming matches. Pietersen is available for selection in the South Africa ODIs, if England loses the next match, I think the public outcry would be significant enough to knock some sense into the thickheaded idiots sitting there at the ECB.

From the many articles i have read most have agreed with the ECB.

Regardless of the next result.

msp83 wrote:I think its unfair to Pietersen that he was harshly dropped while the ECB that organized a leak campaign against him remains unaccountable. I think its unfair to Pietersen that Graeme Swann(another real favorite of me in the English side) got away with a public attack on Pietersen that was, is there for all to see while he was targeted on an SMS that he send to a friend who happened to play for the opposing side, contents of which aren't available in the public domain.

I don't know whether Kevin Pietersen will have any chances to show that to the ludicrous cricketing administrators of the ECB, who imagine themselves to be supermen or loard almighty himself personified, handing out punishments at will or should I say vims and fancies?
But after a public show of power, they are out to humiliate him now, and I'd call that petty.

That is exactly right...ECB's handling of "Pietersengate" is driven by vengence...set him up...rub his nose into the ground....humiliate him publicly.....to set an example.....like taliban parades najed the women who raise their voice.

doesn't matter if it hurts England's cricketing interest.

Cut the nose to spite the face

At the moment they are cutting the fungus to save the tree or if you prefer cutting the chaff from the wheat, get rid of the poison from the cabinet.

msp83 wrote:Would also depend on the direction the England side would take in the coming matches. Pietersen is available for selection in the South Africa ODIs, if England loses the next match, I think the public outcry would be significant enough to knock some sense into the thickheaded idiots sitting there at the ECB.

that's the bottomline......ECB might get away with their steam-rolling approach if England WIN.
Can they win??

if it wasn't for KP's big hundreds agains Lanka and in headingley...they would have lost those tests that they won and drew.

their next 5 test are against SA and Ind in India...and in between a T20 world cup in Lanka.

Common man's and mass media opinion swings wildy with results.
The only thinng that will kill the KP saga for good is if Eng win from here.

skyeman wrote:At the moment they are cutting the fungus to save the tree or if you prefer cutting the chaff from the wheat, get rid of the poison from the cabinet.

ha ha....in prtending to cut the fungus..they chopped of the healthiest chunk of the trunk.....

they retained a lot of the chaff and threw away ripe wheat...

Did they get rid of the poison ?........in the last test they did...Swann didn't play and yet KP got them 4 spinners wickets.
Flower-Swann-Strauss is the core of the posion.

Howver i might be wrong...let ECB prove me so...by winning against SA and in India and the T20 world cup ttile they hold.

Proof is in the bottomline

Don't want much then

Mike Selig wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Swann was warned is a joke
he was like passively encourgaed.

No it isn't and no he wasn't. It is well known amongst England circles that Swann was severely reprimanded after his book was published. It just so happens that it wasn't done in public. KP has similarly been warned in private a few times already. For some offences you can no longer just deal with them privately.

Similarly just because you don't know exactly what KP said in his texts don't assume that the management don't.

What Swann wrote in his book was a bit of a storm in a tea cup. He told us what we already knew - that KP's not an ideal captain and Strauss is. If it caused offence to KP it should have been very minor.

[quote="Shelsey93"]

Mike Selig wrote:
What Swann wrote in his book was a bit of a storm in a tea cup. He told us what we already knew - that KP's not an ideal captain and Strauss is. If it caused offence to KP it should have been very minor.

yeah..what Swann wrote disparagingly in black and white is forgiven...because...errrr...you already know it...so he has the right to mock a fellow player.

what KP maybe/ might have/ speculativel / allegedly/unverifably sent was erath shattering confidential informationa that no one knew......
it wasn't something that we all know like " no matter where you bowl to Strauss he will give it away within 20 runs".......
he revealed BRITIANS NUKE LOCATIONS via a sms to Iran

The thing is, by all accounts this is 1 offense for Swann, and hes been warned as such.

This isn't Pieterson's first run in with the ECB and co.

Although he had problems with Natal (a good stance) he has had issues with Nottingham, Hampshire, Surrey as well as England.

A common denominator?

It's all over twitter that the guy behind the Fake KP account has come forward. He is not a current or former Professional player, but interestingly he does appear to friends with Stuart Broad. Of course just being friends with someone does not automatically link you to every action they take, however it is going to add more fuel to the fire!

Spot on GSC and skyeman.

Were this his first offence I would expect him to be warned and the issue brushed under the carpet, but it isn't. In fact its at least his second major mishap within the last week.

Whatever some papers might have you believe, Swann doesn't "mock" KP in his book. He merely states that he wasn't a great captain - something anybody with a brain would understand and which KP would understand if he had any humility. It only became an issue because at the time our friend Kev was making noises about how he wanted another shot at the captaincy, and some people thought he should have been made one-day captain.

By the way, I think that KP did little wrong in the Moores fiasco other than taking too sharp an approach. As the appointed captain he was well within his rights to enter discussion with the top brass about who the coach should be. Having said that its probably a good job that they didn't let KP have it all his own way - Flower would probably have gone with Moores, and KP wanted an internationally experienced coach.

Strauss and Flower do seem like 2 reasonable people it must be said.

Finally reached the tipping point where KP hurts the team with his antics more than he helps

As an example, lets say England play Germany in a QF of the world cup. Now imagine the outrage if Wayne Rooney texts the German team slagging off Hodgeson.

Swann's comments calling Patel a fat, lying, mediocre spinner in his book were rather unacceptable, I'd have thought.

I think that's a slight exaggeration of what was said Shanky.

OOOh no, mutiny on the bounty. Or 24

KP_fan wrote:

msp83 wrote:Would also depend on the direction the England side would take in the coming matches. Pietersen is available for selection in the South Africa ODIs, if England loses the next match, I think the public outcry would be significant enough to knock some sense into the thickheaded idiots sitting there at the ECB.

that's the bottomline......ECB might get away with their talibanized approach if England WIN.
Can they win??

if it wasn't for KP's big hundreds agains Lanka and in headingley...they would have lost those tests that they won and drew.

their next 5 test are against SA and Ind in India...and in between a T20 world cup in Lanka.

Common man's and mass media opinion swings wildy with results.
The only thinng that will kill the KP saga for good is if Eng win from here.

You have used this reference on a few occasions and to be honest with you i am getting very sick of reading it.